Seamounts, plateaus and governance issues in the southwestern Indian Ocean, with emphasis on fisheries management and marine conservation, using the Walters Shoal as a case study for implementing a protection framework

There is a growing interest in the management of seamounts of the Southwestern Indian Ocean (SWIO) both in waters under national jurisdictions and in the Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ). New scientific knowledge has been gathered through various oceanographic cruises during the past decade, and new agreements are under consideration globally to promote conservation and sustainable use of the biodiversity in the ABNJ, where the deep sea ecosystems associated with seamounts are a growing matter of concern. SWIO seamounts have attracted the interests of fishers since the 1960s, and contracts for mining exploration have been granted recently. Seamounts are known to shelter rich, fragile and poorly resilient ecosystems whose important ecological functions are threatened by various anthropogenic pressures. Whereas many seamounts and shoals are located in national waters, many others fall in the ABNJ, with no current legal status per se. To ensure conservation of their habitats and biodiversity, it is essential that protection measures are instigated under an internationally recognized legal and institutional framework. In this paper, we review the current state of such a framework relevant to seamounts, with emphasis on fisheries and conservation in the SWIO. An emblematic seamount, the Walters Shoal, is selected as a case study to discuss how it could become a fully-protected space in the ABNJ. As a large part of the SWIO is under the mandate of the Nairobi Convention (as a Regional Sea under the auspices of UNEP), guidelines are proposed to encourage dedicated seamount governance within the framework of this Convention.

Patellogastropods, also known as true limpets, are distributed throughout the world and constitute key species in coastal ecosystems. Some limpet species achieve remarkable sizes, which in the most extreme cases can surpass 35 cm in shell length. In this review, we focus on giant limpets, which are defined as those with a maximum shell size surpassing 10 cm. According to the scientific literature, there are a total of 14 species across five genera that reach these larger sizes. Four of these species are threatened or in danger of extinction. Inhabiting the intertidal zones, limpets are frequently affected by anthropogenic impacts, namely collection by humans, pollution and habitat fragmentation. In the case of larger species, their conspicuous size has made them especially prone to human collection since prehistoric times. Size is not phylogeny-dependent among giant limpets, but is instead related to behavioural traits instead. Larger-sized species tend to be nonmigratory and territorial compared to those that are smaller. Collection by humans has been cited as the main cause behind the decline and/or extinction of giant limpet populations. Their conspicuously large size makes them the preferred target of human collection. Because they are protandric species, selectively eliminating larger specimens of a given population seriously compromises their viability and has led to local extinction events in some cases. Additionally, sustained collection over time may lead to microevolutionary responses that result in genetic changes. The growing presence of artificial structures in coastal ecosystems may cause population fragmentation and isolation, limiting the genetic flow and dispersion capacity of many limpet species. However, when they are necessitated, artificial structures could be managed to establish marine artificial microreserves and contribute to the conservation of giant limpet species that naturally settle on them.

AimBiological invasions are major contributors to global change and native biodiversity decline. However, they are overlooked in marine conservation plans. Here, we examine for the first time the extent to which marine conservation planning research has addressed (or ignored) biological invasions. Furthermore, we explore the change of spatial priorities in conservation plans when different approaches are used to incorporate the presence and impacts of invasive species. LocationGlobal analysis with a focus on the Mediterranean Sea region. MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review consisting of three steps: (1) article selection using a search engine, (2) abstract screening and (3) review of pertinent articles, which were identified in the second step. The information extracted included the scale and geographical location of each case study as well as the approach followed regarding invasive species. We also applied the software Marxan to produce and compare conservation plans for the Mediterranean Sea that either protect, or avoid areas impacted by invasives, or ignore the issue. One case study focused on the protection of critical habitats, and the other on endemic fish species. ResultsWe found that of 119 papers on marine spatial plans in specific biogeographic regions, only three (2.5%) explicitly took into account invasive species. When comparing the different conservation plans for each case study, we found that the majority of selected sites for protection (ca. 80%) changed in the critical habitat case study, while this proportion was lower but substantial (27%) in the endemic fish species case study. Main conclusionsBiological invasions are being widely disregarded when planning for conservation in the marine environment across local to global scales. More explicit consideration of biological invasions can significantly alter spatial conservation priorities. Future conservation plans should explicitly account for biological invasions to optimize the selection of marine protected areas.

Coral reef fisheries depend on reef fish biomass to support ecosystem functioning and sustainable fisheries. Here, we evaluated coral reefs across 4,000 km of the Indonesian archipelago to reveal a large gradient of biomass, from 17,000 kg/ha. Trophic pyramids characterized by planktivore dominance emerged at high biomass, suggesting the importance of pelagic pathways for reef productivity. Total biomass and the biomass of most trophic groups were higher within gear restricted and no-take management, but the greatest biomass was found on unmanaged remote reefs. Within marine protected areas (MPAs), 41.6% and 43.6% of gear restricted and no-take zones, respectively, met a global biomass target of 500 kg/ha, compared with 71.8% of remote sites. To improve conservation outcomes for Indonesia's biodiverse and economically important coral reef fisheries, our results suggest to: (1) strengthen management within Indonesia's existing MPAs and (2) precautionarily manage remote reefs with high biomass.

Effective use of spatial management in the pelagic realm presents special challenges due to high fish and fisher mobility, limited knowledge and significant governance challenges. The tropical Indian Ocean provides an ideal case study for testing our ability to apply existing data sources to assessing impacts of spatial management on tuna fisheries because of several recent controversial spatial closures. We review the scientific underpinnings of pelagic MPA effects, spatio-temporal patterns of Indian Ocean tuna catch, by catch and fish movements, and the consequences of these for the efficacy of spatial management for Indian Ocean tropical tuna fisheries. The tropical Indian Ocean is characterized by strong environmental fluctuations, regular seasonal variability in catch, large observed tuna displacement distances, relatively uniform catch-per-unit-effort and bycatch rates over space, and high fisher mobility, all of which suggest significant variability and movement in tropical tuna fisheries that are simply not well adapted to static spatial closures. One possible exception to this overall conclusion would be a large time/area closure east of Somalia. If closed for a significant fraction of the year it could reduce purse-seine bycatch and juvenile tuna catch. Dynamic closures following fish migratory patterns are possible, but more focused information on fish movements will be needed for effective implementation. Fortunately, several recent improvements in conventional fishery management and reporting will likely enhance our ability to evaluate spatial and non-spatial management options in the near future, particularly as pertaining to bycatch species.